**6. References**

Abbey, A.T. 2005. Biogas in Uganda: A new experience*. Leisa,* 21:13-15

AfriNews 2008. Deforestation reaches worrying level – UN.


poverty which poses a constant barrier to social and economic development in developing

Biogas initiatives in Africa is characterised by small to medium scale plants. Biogas technology is however, still beyond the reach of rural poor due to its high initial investment costs. There also exist a number of constraints affecting the implementation of the biogas technology on large scale such as: political, social-cultural, financial, informational, institutional, technical and training constraints. Priority issues which must be tackled by African countries for the development of biogas technology include: evaluation or reevaluation of the energy demand and supply patterns and their sectoral distributions at national level in order to estimate the contribution of biogas technology and other renewable energy make to the nation; assessment of the potential of new and renewable energy sources such as biogas so as to tailor their use to the actual needs, and to substitute them for conventional sources wherever appropriate; support of investigations, application,

development, training and demonstration for the development of biogas technology.

Abbey, A.T. 2005. Biogas in Uganda: A new experience*. Leisa,* 21:13-15

industrial waste. *Water Science Technology,*25:311-318.

AfriNews 2008. Deforestation reaches worrying level – UN.

*Sustainable Energy Reviews,* 5:97-112.

*Management*, 69:115-128.

Sub-Saharan Africa with its warm climates is well-suited for the biogas digester technology. However, it is very important to consider the practical gender needs, which fulfil the regular energy needs at household level while saving the time and labour of women, and the strategic gender needs, which provides the opportunities for women to be involved in social and economic activities for their self-enhancement and empowerment at the planning phase

 http://www.africanews.com/site/list\_messages/18831 [accessed 2 October 2011]. Ahring B, Angelidaki I, Johansen K. 1992.Anaerobic treatment of manure together with

Akinbami J.-F.K., Ilori M.O., Oyebisi T.O., Akinwuni I.O., Adeoti O. 2001. Biogas energy use

Akinbami J.-F.K., Salami, A.T., Siyanbola, W.O. 2003. An integrated strategy for sustainable

Amigun B., Sigamoney R., von Blottnitz H. 2008. Commercialisation of biofuel industry in Africa: A review. *Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews,* 12:690-711. Amigun B., von Blottnitz H. 2007. Investigation of scale economies for African biogas

Amigun, b. von Blottnitz, H. 2010. Capacity-cost and location-cost analyses for biogas plants

Angelidaki, I., Boe, K. and Ellegaard L. 2004 Effect of operating conditions and reactor

configuration on efficiency of full-scale biogas plants. Proceedings of the 10th World Congress in Anaerobic Digestion, Montreal Canada, 29th August-2nd September. Angelidaki, I., and Ellegaard L. 2003. Co digestion of manure and organic wastes in centralised biogas plants. *Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology,* 109:95-105.

installations. *Energy Conversion and Management*, 48:3090-3094.

in Africa. *Resources, Conservation and Recycling,* 55, 63-73.

in Nigeria: current status, future prospects and policy implications. *Renewable and* 

forest-energy-environment interactions in Nigeria. *Journal of environmental* 

countries such as Africa.

of biogas development.

**6. References** 


Anaerobic Biogas Generation for Rural Area Energy Provision in Africa 59

Kaparaju P, Luostarinen S, Kalmari J, Rintala J. 2002. Co-digestion of energy crops and

Karekezi S. 1994a. Renewable energy technologies as an option for a low-carbon energy

Karekezi, S. 1994b. Disseminating renewable energy technologies in sub-Saharan Africa.

Kashyap, D.R., Dadhich, K.S. and Sharma, S.K. 2003 Biomethanation under psychrophilic

Kivaisi A.K. and Rubindamayugi, M.S.T. 1996. The potential of agro-industrial residues for

Laichena J.K., Wafula J.C. 1997. Biogas technology for rural households in Kenya.

Lantz, M., Svensson, M., Björnsson, L., and Börjesson, P. 2007. The prospects for an

Lema, J.M. and Omil, F. 2001 Anaerobic treatment: a key technology for sustainable management of wastes in Europe. *Water Science and Technology*, 44, 133-140. Lissens, G., Vandevivere, P., de Baere, L., Biey, E.M. and Verstraete, W. 2001 Solid waste

Lettinga, G. 1995 Anaerobic digestion and wastewater treatment systems. *Antonie van* 

Lettinga, G., Hulshoff Pol, L.W., Zeeman, G., Field, J., van Lier, J.B., van Buuren, J.C.L. 1997.

Lettinga, G. 2001 Digestion and degradation, air for life. *Water Science and Technology*, 44(8),

Lettinga, G. 2004 With anaerobic treatment approach towards a more sustainable and robust

Masekoameng KE, Simaleng TE and Saidi T.2005. Journal of Energy in Southern Africa 3:

Mata-Alvarez, J., Macé, S. and Llabre`s, P. 2000 Anaerobic digestion of organic solid wastes.

Mbohwa, C and Fukuda, S. 2003 Electricity from baggasse in Zimbabwe. *Biomass and* 

Mbuligwe, S.E. 2002. Institutional solid waste management practices in developing

*International Conference on Anaerobic Digestion. Sendai*, pp. 32-39.

*Montreal, Canada, 29th August-3rd September*, Vol 1 pp. 2-12.

Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) *Energy Review*, 21:

expansion of biogas systems in Sweden – Incentives, barriers and potentials.

digesters: process performance and practice for municipal solid waste digestion.

Anaerobic treatment in sustainable environmental production concepts. In: *8th*

environmental protection. In: *10th International Conference on Anaerobic Digestion.* 

An overview of research achievements and perspectives. Review paper. *Bioresource* 

countries: a case study of three academic institutions in Tanzania. Resources,

production of biogas and electricity in Tanzania. *WREC*, 917-921.

evaluation. *Water Science and Technology*,45:275-280.

conditions: a review. *Bioresource Technology*, 87, 147-153.

Energy and Environment.

*Annual Reviews,* 19:387-421.

Energy Policy, 35:1830-1843.

*Leeuwenhoek*, 67, 3-28.

*Technology*, 74, 3-16.

*Bioenergy,* 25, 197-207.

Conservation and Recycling 35:131-146.

*Water Science and Technology*, 44, 91-102.

223-244.

157-176.

4-9.

industrial confectionery by-products with cow manure: batch-scale and farm-scale

future for developing countries: case examples from Eastern and Southern Africa. International Conference on National Action to Mitigate Global Climate Change. 7- 9 June, Copenhagen, Denmark. Organised by UNEP Collaborating Centre on


http://www.snvworld.org/en/Documents/NBP\_implementation\_document\_Ethi opia\_2008.pdf [accessed 10 October 2011].


de Baere, L. 2000 Anaerobic digestion of solid waste: state of the art. *Water Science and* 

Edelmann, W., Schleiss, K. and Joss, A. 2000 Ecological, energetic and economic comparison

EREDPC 2008. National Biogas Programme Ethiopia. Programme Implementation

Francese A.P., Aboagye-Mathiesen G., Olesen T., Co'rdoba P.R. and Sineriz F. 2000 Feeding

Foresti, E. 2001. Perspectives on anaerobic treatment in developing countries. *Water Science* 

Frankin, R.J. 2001. Full-scale experiences with anaerobic treatment of industrial wastewater.

Gijzen, H.J. 2001 Anaerobes, aerobes and phototrophs, a winning team for wastewater

Gijzen, H.J. 2002 Anaerobic digestion for sustainable development: a natural approach.

Grommen, R. and W. Verstraete 2002 Environmental biotechnology: the ongoing quest.

Gujer, W. and Zehnder, A.J.B. 1983 Conversion processes in anaerobic digestion. *Water* 

Gunaseelan, V.N. 1997 Anaerobic digestion of biomass for methane production: A review.

Hall D.O., Rosillo-Calle F., de Groot P. 1992. Lessons from case studies in developing

Hiemstra-van der Horst, G. Hovorka, A. J. 2009. Fuelwood: The "other" renewable energy

http://www.hivos.nl/eng/community/partner/10009895 [accessed 28 September

Households-now-enjoy-the-benefit-of-domestic-biogas [accessed 10 October 2011].

treatment technology for municipal and industrial wastewaters: summary paper.

http://www.hivos.nl/dut/Users/Members/jmsika/Jean-Marc-Sika/Ethiopian-

 http://www.irinnews.org/report.aspx?reportid=61528 [accessed 8 October 2011]. Iza, J., Colleeran, E., Paris, J.M. and Wu, W.M. 1991 International workshop on anaerobic

http://www.gtz.de/de/dokumente/en-biogas-volume1.pdf[accessed28

wastes. *Water Science and Technology*, 41, 263-273.

opia\_2008.pdf [accessed 10 October 2011].

*World Journal of Biotechnology,* 16:147-150.

*Water Science and Technology*, 44, 141-148.

*Water Science and Technology*, 45, 321-328.

*Journal of Biotechnology*, 98(1), 113-123. GTZ and ISAT (undated). Biogas digest volume 1.

*Science and Technology*, 15, 127-167.

*Biomass and Bioenergy*, 13, 83-114.

Hivos 2009a. Africa Biogas Partnership Initiative.

*Water Science and Technology*, 24, 1-7.

countries. *Energy Policy*, Janaury:62-73.

management. *Water Science and Technology*, 44, 123-132.

source for Africa? *Biomass and Bioenergy,* 33, 1605-1616.

IRIN 2006. Deforestation exacerbates droughts, floods. 10 November.

Hivos 2009b. Ethiopian households now enjoy the benefit of domestic biogas.

of anaerobic digestion with different competing technologies to treat biogenic

http://www.snvworld.org/en/Documents/NBP\_implementation\_document\_Ethi

approaches for biogas production from animal wastes and industrial effluents.

*Technology*, 41, 283-290.

*and Technology*, 44, 1-6.

September2011].

2011].

Document.


Anaerobic Biogas Generation for Rural Area Energy Provision in Africa 61

http://www.impattoambientale.it/documenti/Rapporto%20FAO%202009.pdf

Rajeshwari, K.V., Balakrishnan, M., Kansal, A., Kusum Lata, and Kishore, V.V.N. 2000 State-

Rebac, S., van Lier, J.B., Janssen, M.G.J., Dekkers, F., Swinkels, K.T.M., and Lettinga, G.1997

Rushbrook PE. Co-disposal of industrial wastes with municipal solid wastes. *Resource* 

Singh K.J., Sooth S.S. 2004. Comparative study of economics of different models of family size biogas plants for state of Punjab, India. *Energy Convers Manage*, 45:1329-41. Smith, K.R., Rogers, J. & Cowlin, S.C. 2005*.* Household fuels and ill-health in developing

World LP Gas Association & Intermediate Technology Development Group. Switzenbaum, M.S. 1995. Obstacles in the implementation of anaerobic treatment

Tafdrup, S. 1995. Viable energy production and waste recycling from anaerobic digestion of manure and other biomass materials. *Biomass and Bioenergy*, 9, 303-314. Tafdrup S. 1994. Centralised biogas plants combine agricultural and environmental benefits

Taleghani G, Kia AS. 2005. Technical–economical analysis of the Saveh biogas power plant.

http://www.odi.org.uk/resources/libraries/forestry-grey-literature/headload.pdf

http://www.thebioenergysite.com/articles/308/tanzania-sisal-biogas [accessed 10

United Nations 2007. World urbanization prospects: the 2007 revision population

ATA1/Vacancy/fileadmin/user\_media/PMO/IDB38/doc/index.php?id=7881&tx \_ttnews[tt\_news]=244&cHash=f33e93f0c4a4efc60ed7f7ee5f149b47 [accessed 10

 http://allafrica.com/stories/201107041813.html [accessed 25 September 2011]. UNIDO 2008. Inauguration of the first sisal biogas electricity pilot plan in the world. http://www.unido.org/index.php%3Fid%3D4835%26ucg\_no64%3D1/DATA1/D

with energy production. *Water Science and Technology*,30:133-141.

The East African 2011. Tanzania to double sisal-fired biogas capacity, 3 July.

http://esa.un.org/unup/p2k0data.asp [accessed 11 October 2011].

countries: what improvements can be brought by LP gas (LPG)? Paris, France,

http://www.hivos.nl/english/News/News/The-Tanzania-Domestic-Biogas-

of-the-art of anaerobic digestion technology for industrial wastewater treatment.

High rate anaerobic treatment of malting waste water in a pilot-scale EGSB system under psychrophilic conditions. *Journal of Chemical Technology and Biotechnology*, 68,

PISCES and FAO 2009. Small-scale bioenergy initiatives.

*Conservation Recycling* 1990;4:33-49.

*Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews*, 4, 135-156.

Sika, JM (2010). The Tanzania Domestic Biogas Programme gets up to speed!

Programme-gets-up-to-speed [accessed 10 October 2011].

technology. *Bioresource Technology*, 53, 255-262.

Tarlton JE (Undated). Woodfuel in Ciskei: a headload study.

Renewable Energy. 30:441–6.

[accessed 9 September 2011]. The Bioenergy Site ,2009. Tanzania sisal biogas.

October 2011].

October 2011].

database.

[accessed 10 October 2011].

135-146.


Mbuligwe S.E., and Kassenga, G.R. 2004. Feasibility and strategies for anaerobic digestion of

Mekonnen, M 2006. Drought, famine and conflict: the case from the horn of Africa.

Misi S.N, Forster CF. 2001. Batch co-digestion of two component mixtures of agro-wastes.

Mshandete, A., Björnsson, L., Kivaisi, A.K., Rubindamayugi, M.S.T., and Mattiasson B. 2006.

Mshandete A. and Parawira W. 2009. Biogas technology research in selected sub-Saharan African countries – a review. *African Journal of Biotechnology,* 8:116-125. Mwakaje A.G. 2007. Dairy farming and biogas use in Rungwe district, South-west Tanzania:

Murphy, J.T. 2001. Making the energy transition in rural East Africa: Leapfrogging an

Ni, J. Q., and Nyns, E.J. 1996. New concept for the evaluation of rural biogas management in

Noykova, N., Muller, T.G., Gyllenberg, M., and Timmer, J. 2002 Quantitative analysis of

Oguntoke O, Opeolu B O and Babatunde N.2010. Indoor air pollution and health risks

Omer, A. M., and Fadalla, Y. 2003. Biogas energy technology in Sudan. *Renewable Energy,*

Parawira W. 2004a. Anaerobic batch digestion of solid potato waste alone and in combination with sugar beet leaves. Renewable Energy, 29:1811-1823. Parawira W. 2004b. Anaerobic treatment of agricultural residues and wastewater:

Parawira, W., Kudita, I., Nyandoroh M.G., Zvauya, R. 2005. A study of industrial

Parawira, W., Murto, M., Read, J.S. and Mattiasson, B. 2007. Study of two-stage anaerobic

Parawira, W., Read, J. S., Mattiasson, B., and Björnsson, L. 2008. Energy production from

Pavlostathis, S.G. and Giraldo-Gomez, E. 1991 Kinetics of anaerobic treatment. *Water Science* 

Biotechnology, Lund University, Sweden ISBN: 91-89627-28-8.

conditions. Environmental Technology, 28: 1205-1216.

digestion. *Biomass and Bioenergy*, 32:44-50.

alternative? *Technological Forecasting and Social Change,* 68:73-193.

developing countries. *Energy Convers. Mgmt*, 37:1525:1534.

Estimation. *Biotechnology and Bioengineering*, 78, 89-103.

Environmental Studies and Management 3: 39-46.

*Process Safety and Environment Protection*,79(B6):365-371.

*Conservation and Recycling*, 42:183-203.

id=6796 [accessed 9 October, 2011].

31:2385-2392.

Article in press.

28:499-507.

*Biochemistry*, 40:593-599.

*Technology*, 24, 35 - 59.

solid waste for energy production in Dar es Salaam city, Tanzania. *Resources,* 

http://www.beyondintractability.org/case\_studies/drought\_famine\_conflict.jsp?n

Effect of particle size on biogas yield from sisal fibre waste. *Renewable Energy,*

A study of opportunities and constraints. *Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews*,

anaerobic wastewater treatment processes: Identifiability and Parameter

among rural dwellers in Odeda area, South-Western Nigeria. Ethiopian Journal of

Application of high-rate reactors. Doctoral dissertation, Department of

anaerobic treatment of opaque beer brewery wastewater in a tropical climate using a full-scale UASB reactor seeded with activated sludge. *Process* 

digestion of solid potato waste using reactors under mesophilic and thermophilic

agricultural residues: high methane yields in pilot scale two-stage anaerobic

PISCES and FAO 2009. Small-scale bioenergy initiatives. http://www.impattoambientale.it/documenti/Rapporto%20FAO%202009.pdf [accessed 10 October 2011].


http://esa.un.org/unup/p2k0data.asp [accessed 11 October 2011].

**1. Introduction** 

*al.*, 2010).

**3** 

**Rheological Characterization** 

Anna Karlsson, Jörgen Ejlertsson and Bo H. Svensson *Department of Thematic Studies, Water and Environmental Studies,* 

The biogas process has long been a part of our biotechnical solutions for the handling of sewage sludge and waste. However, in many cases the existing process applications need to be optimized to improve the extent of biogas production as a part of the energy supply in a sustainable and viable society. Although the principles are well known, process disturbances and poor substrate utilization in existing biogas plants are common and are in

Changes in substrate composition can be done as a means to obtain a more efficient utilization of existing biogas facilities, which today treating mainly manure or sewage sludge. By bring in more energy rich residues and wastes a co-digestion process with higher biogas potential per m3 volatile solids (VS) can often be obtained. However, new and changing feedstocks may result in shift in viscosity of the process liquid and, hence, problems with inadequate mixing, break down of stirrers and foaming. These disturbances may seriously affect the degradation efficiency and, hence, also the gas-production per unit organic material digested. In turn, operational malfunctions will cause significant logistic problems and increased operational costs. Changes of the substrate profile for a biogas plant

Together with high digestion efficiency, i.e. maximum methane formation per reactor volume and time, the economy of a biogas plant operation depends on the energy invested to run the process. A main part of the energy consumed during operation of continuous stirred tank reactors (CSTRs) is due to the mixing of the reactor material (Nordberg and Edström, 2005). The shear force needed is dependent on the viscosity of the reactor liquid, where increasing viscosity demands a higher energy input. Active stirring must be implemented in order to bring the microorganisms in contact with the new feedstock, to facilitate the upflow of gas bubbles and to maintain an even temperature distribution in the digester. Up to 90% of biogas CSTR plants use mechanical stirring equipment (Weiland *et* 

In this context the rheological status of the reactor liquid as well as of the residual digestate are important for process mixing design and dimensioning. In addition experiences on rhelogical characterisation of sewage sludge revealing their dependence on the suspended

many cases likely linked to changes in the substrate composition.

may also infer modifications of the downstream treatment of the digestate.

Annika Björn, Paula Segura de La Monja,

*Linköping University,* 

*Sweden* 

United Nations 2010. Number of city dwellers grows amidst continuing disparities in level and pace of urbanization worldwide.

http://esa.un.org/unpd/wup/Documents/WUP2009\_Press-

Release\_Final\_Rev1.pdf [accessed 29 September 2011].


 http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/csd/csd16/rim/eca\_bg3.pdf [accessed 9 September 2011


World Economic Outlook 2010. Access to electricity.

http://www.iea.org/weo/electricity.asp [accessed 30 September, 2011]

Zeeman, G. and Saunders, W. 2001. Potential of anaerobic digestion of complex waste (water)s. *Water Science and Technology*, 44, 115-122.

Annika Björn, Paula Segura de La Monja, Anna Karlsson, Jörgen Ejlertsson and Bo H. Svensson *Department of Thematic Studies, Water and Environmental Studies, Linköping University, Sweden* 
